USA: In Search of the Big Enemy5
out of 5
based on 4 ratings.
4 user reviews.

USA: In Search of the Big Enemy

Donate

Originally appeared at A-specto, translated by Borislav exclusively for SouthFront

Some time ago the Italian General Fabio Mini, commander of UN forces in Kosovo (KFOR), warned through the Italian media, about the increased risk of a military conflict in Europe that may arise from the aggressive US policy of trying to resolve US geo-strategic tasks. Its not new, that the Ministry of defense is planning operations globally. But the obsession of the US military in search of the “Big enemy” could drag Europe into a military conflict, and not necessarily with Russia .

Recently the US has been updating its military plans in case of aggression by Russia in the Baltic region. According to Foreign Policy, the new plan will include activities not only in the composition of NATO, but also independent US armed forces operations. Its normal for military command, to plan operations in response to unforeseen threats or to update their old plans. During the Cold War there were also plans, but plans were developed as part of block vs block conflict. The collapse of the Eastern bloc was a big surprise for the West and it quickly turned from an unexpected gift to a planned victory. We must note however, that the winners had no idea, not to mention any prepared plans, of what they will do without an equal in strength opponent. After trying to adapt the old doctrine the the new enemy, or rather to the absence of one, it was decided to create a new completely fictional image of the enemy.

This period was also used for large-scale military modernization, which was based on the appearance of vague risks. Society was gradually subjected to increasing militarism, which manifested itself in every sphere. As explanations for this were given many reasons, from the emergence of the economic crisis to the price of cabbage. General strategies and long-term planning were forgotten. For opening new fronts were initiated “spring” revolutions in the Arab world, and organized small, local wars. There was a focus on fighting terrorism, which appeared as a result of induced conflicts by the Americans themselves. New participants in power were given room for maneuver and just as in the case of the “Islamic State”, they themselves became a source of power and fear. Many things were done in order to justify the existence of infinitely inflated security structures. The result is that today the security situation is significantly worse than 25 years ago .

Therefore the need to recreate the image of the “enemy” is not surprising, as its needed to melt fears and to free the way for a new, colossal military spending. This is not driven so much by the need to plan a real war, as much from the intentions of the military for an expensive and endless preparation for such a war. The kind of war that could send mankind back to the Stone Age. And without hesitation the Pentagon discovered that nearly perfect new enemy in the face of China. In 2012, the US adopted its first since the Second World War significant strategic decision. The attention of US policymakers shifted from the Atlantic to the Pacific. They had mobilized all competitors and opponents of China in the Far East and Oceania. USA started hard to draw plans for a military conflict between the air and naval forces of the two countries. However, China responded to this with an open, large-scale economic activity and not particularly ambitious increase in military spending.

The second initiative of political and strategic nature of the US was related to the signed agreement on Iran’s nuclear program. With this document Tehran practically became the legitimate leader in the Middle East theater. Immediately after that came the partnership agreement Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, behind which stood the intentions of Obama to secure the western flank of the open front in the Far East. Against this background, Europe looked almost defenseless and demilitarized. And the United States were quick to “help” the Europeans to clash with Russia, revealing her as yet another ‘great enemy’ of the West. Relations with Russia were interrupted by the murderous sanctions imposed on the country.

After the end of the cold war, the intentions of the West were to return Russia to the bosom of Europe by strengthening military cooperation. But instead, there began a gradual encirclement of Russia by the military structures of NATO and the enhanced economic impact of the EU close to its borders. Therefore, the uncompromising military operation of Russia against Georgia in 2008 and her actions in Ukraine can not be seen as completely unfounded. It is understandable that the penalties imposed and the ongoing expansion of the EU and NATO near Russia’s borders rather than leading to riots against the policies of President Putin, provoked a strong wave of nationalism in the country.

On the other hand, there is nothing surprising in the planned military conflict by the United States in the Baltics. In the Mediterranean and the Middle East operate the old American war allies in the face of France and Britain and even Italy, albeit somewhat timidly. The Baltic theater borders on the territory of Russia which are American allies called the “New Europe”. The governments of these countries, managed by the US, have long sought a way to cause a sharp conflict with Russia. Naturally they do not realize that they jeopardize not only their own survival, but the survival of Europe. For the military plans of the US it is very important to have control of the countries of “New Europe”, located along the Russian borders from the Baltic to the Black Sea. In the same way as they influence the policy of Japan and South Korea in the Far East.

The scenario for terrestrial operation of the USA in the Baltic countries is technically possible, but almost disconnected with reality. However, if we look at US actions such as the use of media and the Internet to influence the activation of civil revolutions, skilfully managed from “outside” and more cleverly from “inside” (brilliantly demonstrated in Ukraine), the preparation for war is very real. The Pentagon changed the rules and manipulates key factors to provoke a war in Europe, which of course will be fatal. All this is strange and at the same time extremely dangerous for both the US image as a great power, and for European security. Strange and dangerous, is that the planning of military operations continue, though for today’s US administration entering into a new war is not possible. But let’s not forget that the Obama administration will be leaving soon, and the Pentagon has enough people who expect (or hope) that after the victory of any of the presidential candidates, the preparation for war in the Far East or Europe will be approved. This of course will be a war that no one can win.